http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...amp;TM=32796.78

When I was in high school, my parents had a cottage with a Saugatuck address, three or four miles by water from downtown Saugatuck.

Saugatuck has a long history of development along the river. Anyone who has been there knows that the entire downtown area is no more than four blocks from the Kalamazoo River, which is a navigable river for miles and miles, unlike our little Trail Creek. Saugatuck started off as a logging town (google Singapore, MIchigan for more info), and became an artist colony in the early 1900's. They had enough sense to turn to tourism as their main industry some time ago. According to wikipedia, the year round population is about 1000, but summer population is about 3000. I'm not sure how much of a model Saugatuck can be for MC, given the difference in scale.

However, one point does hit home. The key to north end redevelopment is Lake Michigan, which is to say boating and boat slips. Those proposed high rises are going to empty unless a sizable percentage of the owners are going to have boat slips to go with their condos. MIchigan City is for all practical purposes the only town in Indiana with access to Lake Michigan for recreational boating, and we need to capitalize on that. The owners of the proposed condos are going to be Chicago people buying second homes. I have no problem with Chicago people spending money here, tourism dollars and property taxes for second homes that they use only a small part of the year, and I have to question the sanity and/or smarts of anyone who does have a problem with it.

For purposes of north end redevelopment, the two primary resources we have are the lake and our proximity to Chicago. In my mind's eye, Chicago is like a vein of ore that we have to mine. And that ore, my friends, is cash.

See, that is the problem. You do not see the long-run effect of removing the waterfront from public access. Oh, well.

Does the waterfront on Trail Creek from US 12 south have any significant public access now? When I look at it on Google Maps, what I see is the casino from US 12 to the E street bridge on the east side, and Blocksom and a marina on the west side. What public access are we going to lose?

The point is that it is already lost. I want it regained so that there will be a better reason (or any) to develop more than the immediate waterfront.

Good point. I agree

Have you looked at the Lohan Anderson Trail Creek Plan, Roger?

http://www.emichigancity.com/cityhall/depa..._Creek_Plan.pdf

What I am seeing in that plan is public access to Trail Creek which we currently do not have, some retail establishments along the creek, and the balance would be residences. However, it appears to me that the actual creek edge is accessible to the public for the whole length.

While I am as skeptical about all the "plans" and "studies" as anyone, this one looks pretty good to me. Implementation is something else all together, but unless you want to turn everything between the creek and Michigan Blvd. into a grassy park (which would do absolutely nothing in regards to helping the north end -- who's going to stop there to look at a ditch when they can go a couple miles further and be on Lake Michigan?), the Lohan Anderson plan is a vast improvement over the way things are now.

Has anyone in Michigan City wondered why the State of the City address happened in the first week of January? Right smack on top of the sanitary district hiring debacle, instead of the usual second or third week in February. Has anyone looked at the fact it calls for putting all our eggs in a plan that calls for housing lots of housing, upscale housing. Sorry neighbors, but we have got to get our heads out of the clouds. This plan, this concept new urban renewal, huge investment in the housing market is about ten years to late. Oberlie at this for over 35 years, starting in the planning dept. has not got a clue. He head is not in the clouds it is up his..... well, you know what I mean. I work for a family business, part of our business involves building and selling upscale housing. The last one we did sold for 2.2 million dollars, we sold it in December of 2006. We have not even bothered looking at another parcel of property since. Why? Because the housing market is in the dumps. The sub prime lending has not even fully hit us yet and the banks are not very free at lending money right now. What we will end up with is a north end that looks like Roger Willoughbys Michigan Boulevard gas station development.
If you go back to Mr. Oberlies last State of the City address you will find a call to work at ridding Michigan City of the neglected and abandoned properties in our neighborhoods. He said we must find ways to attract people back into our neighborhoods. What did Oberlie lay as the foundation to accomplish this? We started the year off issuing building permits to a very controversial housing complex at the questionable outskirts of town in a cornfield. Next change the zoning in a residential neighborhood to commercial and issue building permits to erect a gas station in a residential neighborhood, across the street from a park. (judge saw it as wrong and overturned it thank God) We ended the year allowing a car crushing junk yard the permit to operate a couple of hundred feet away from an area he claims he is trying to attract family's to live.
The inspection Dept. has no teeth to go after the property owners to keep up their property, we do nothing to change a system. A system we know does not work. I have one of these boarded up houses right out my front door. It has been this way since Chuck has been in charge. As long as Michigan City continues doing the same thing, the same way it will be there till he is gone.
So Michigan City be warned, this North End plan on the Oberlie fast track may just run us all over.

WASHINGTON (AP) - United for urgent action, the White House and Congress raced toward emergency steps Thursday to rescue the national economy from a possible recession, including tax rebates of at least $300 a person - and maybe as much as $800. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke endorsed the idea of putting money into the hands of those who would spend it quickly and boost the flagging economy.

All the talk of rescue efforts failed to soothe Wall Street. The Dow Jones industrials plunged 306.95 points, underscoring deepening concern about the country's economic health.

The sudden scramble to take action came as fears mounted that a severe housing slump and a painful credit crisis could cause people to clamp down on their spending and businesses to put a lid on hiring, throwing the country into its first recession since 2001.

Did anyone else watch the unveiling of the north end plan last night? A great idea and plan, but I think Ilove is right, 10 years too late. I just don't know where you are going to find a developer to pony up that kind of cash in this time.

I did forget to post the preview I got from Alderman Murphy. There are links to the plan that was presented last night.

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...;ArticleID=8865

I was at the meeting last night. I was the guy standing next to Rich Murphy, if you were there southsider. There's supposed to be a poll about it on the N-D website, but I'm not finding it, just the article at:
http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...amp;TM=49192.93

which I see on preview Southsider has quoted already.



Two things I really like about this study -- first, they come down hard against the idea of moving the 11th street South Shore station, actually making the station a major part of their plan, and second (which isn't mentioned in the N-D article), they remove the library and city hall and run Franklin back out to the lake.

I do agree that this plan isn't going to happen tomorrow. With the sub-prime lending market imploding, and with the current admin in City Hall, it just isn't happening until the next election cycle.

I did not go, but I watched it on Ch 97.

I did find it interesting that after blasting Joie Winski's idea to move the library during the election cycle, the ND was 100% silent on that being a centerpiece of this plan, along with some major revamps of City Hall.

I thought (re)moving the library was interesting, but still think it is not Necessary. I dont see why all the building would happen in between all the shops on mich Blvd Franklin.

The best thing was the idea of making it a Gold Diamond, instead of, a Golden Triangle, by developing the 11th street South Shore station: Franklin St Bridge--8th and Mich--Station--Lighthouse place(let's say 6th and Wabash). Potratz the architect has talked about the east/west corridor as a neglected key part of any plan, prob along 6th st.

I've got to disagree with you on this one, Rog. For the City to benefit, waterfront redevelopment has to be about best use. From the Franklin St. bridge to the E St. bridge, it is all about boat slips. The general public is going to have little interest in walking along the creek side between those two points when they can take in a better view at Millenium Park or walk the catwalk to the Lighthouse. We have public access to waterfront property at the Indiana Lakeshore/Mt. Baldy, Washington Park, Millenium Park, Peanut Bridge, Krueger Park and International Friendship Gardens. I don't feel deprived.

The Golden Triangle did not work. Trying a failed plan over only bigger sounds just like what Oberlie would do. Winski's plan so for is the only one that would attract developers to use their money instead of ours.

I have to disagree here. The Golden Triangle was never anything that would "work," is simply is. The main features of the north end are the casino boat, the lakefront, and the outlet mall. That is a simple fact. It's also a fact that no one has done anything to use the "Golden Triangle" to jump start north end redevelopment even though it has been talked about since the original Andersen plan.
Though there have been major steps backward (can you say "Franklin Square"?) which were implemented by certain people who are still running the show.

I agree with most of your post. The part I disagree with is that the triangle is part of it. When Sheila was on the committee selecting the company to receive the license here, she chose Blue Chip and its upstream location. Solely to create the Golden Triangle. The other two firms were offering between 15 and 20 million more per year through the agreement of suitability. Just having the Golden Triangle would revitalize downtown MC by itself. Never happened. When other Cities with boats are getting 5-8% of the adjusted gross revenue, we are getting a whopping .6%

I was unaware of that bit of history, lovethiscity. Before my time.

So the riverboat was placed where it is, and potential revenues from it were substantially reduced, in order to create the "Golden Triangle," with the expectation that the "Golden Triangle effect" would revitalize the north end. And then the architects of that plan, who were for the most part the architects of the Franklin Square plan which killed the north end to begin with, stepped back and waited for... I dunno, magic to happen, and the north end would resurrect itself.

I really wish someone would write a History of Michigan City which would include all this stuff. I'd pay real money for a copy of that. Stuff like which families are the prominent MC families (I'm a newcomer here, during the last primary my reaction to LaRocco was "Who?"), stuff like the history of the airport (the old one where Menard's is now, the attempt by our town fathers to scam the FAA out of grant money, and the resulting purchase of the current airport), the whole Franklin Square debacle, etc. Stuff that the LaPorte County Historical Society would find a bit too current to concern themselves with. Maybe I should check out some of their stuff anyway.

It would be interesting to see. Wonder who they'd include...the Barker and Ruby families would be obvious. I'd like to think the Winski's would make it in too.

SSider, I've been wondering the same thing all along. But, if it goes through, they should have no problem finding enough private developers to make it happen.

The most realistic plan I have heard so far is levitation like when Abbie Hoffmann lifted the Pentagon a while back. I could set it down on the Mem Hosp site.

The history truthfully written as it has happened in the last 35 years would be taken as a fictional comedy. For instance as City Planner Oberlie tried to increase traffic on North Franklin and for the last ten years has been attempting through highways to nowhere in corn fields to take traffic off South Franklin. This guy has no clue. The thought of hiring a traffic study is out of the question. This is from the City that does nothing but pay for studies

Oberlie has NO BUSINESS being involved in city gov't. He was part of the planning crew that got us into such a position. He does not have the vision or brains to lead us out. MC: Fools for electing him, durn fools for re-electing him.

Roger, most of us here would agree with you on that, but more of his supports came out to vote than the other 2 candidates combined...and that was a long time ago. It's time to move on, and find other ways to continue to be involved in improving the City...not just compaining with no action.

Ancient history here but I consider this the first fatal flaw our founding fathers made



Hoosier Slide, standing 175 feet tall on the west bank of Trail Creek, dominated the area's landscape for centuries. Tourists from all parts of the world arrived by excursion trains and ships to climb the huge sand dune, rewarded at the top with a spectacular view. Like many other lake dunes, Hoosier Slide was mined for use as land fill and in glass making. By the 1920's, nothing remained of the giant dune.

My point is that we see the error because we pay the opportunity cost which was essentially ignored at the time. I do not want people in the CBTL forum in 75 years to be complaining about the run-down buildings along the lake and creek and wondering how they are going to clean up the area and make it attractive.

I agree Roger, with the park board now well represented on the City Council. They will soon push to change the legislation so they can put a hotel on Bismark Hill, The last Dune in the park. We should not sit around and say nothing. We need to keep the failures up front so we do not continue repeating them.

Tell me, with some specifics, how Joie Winski would be doing a better job of getting rid of the the blight on Trail Creek (Blocksom, Ice House and Weber Sign). That is, short of hosing the taxpayers by overpaying (or paying anything, for that matter). Tell me how she would have avoided all the court time associated with eminent domain. We know you have some ax to grind with the Mayor, but your are starting to sound petty.

How quickly we forget what we've said in the past, MCStumper.
These are quotes from you regarding the North End plan that Joie presented during her campaign:





You seemed to have liked her ideas then...what changed for you?
By the way, she's not even part of the redevelopment commission anymore. She wasn't reappointed this year (or did you miss that when it happened a few months ago?) Leave her out of it.

Roger's post had more to do with private developers monopolizing the lakefront and restricting public access than anything else.

The fact is that 2 legs of the Golden Triangle are not designed to revitalize anything. The Outlet Mall and the boat are designed to keep people confined to those areas. As an "economic engine", casinos and boats have failed to revitalize any area. Sure the Boat brings in $$$ but at what cost to the community at large?

Same deal with the Outlet Mall, it really did little for the immediate neighborhood.

The library didn't kill the North End...the Marquette Mall and the South End did that. The scenario of the malls killing off the downtowns played out all over the country. So lets look at the some nearby communities that made the same mistake and have managed to correct it...Chicago and Oak Park both have vibrant downtowns after a pedestrian mall fiasco.

We have great transportation from the North End to Chicago. OK, it takes 1.5 hours, but lots of people are commuting that long from Naperville, Lemont, Racine, etc... to Chicago and they are paying premium prices for their homes in those suburbs. Why doesn't someone market Michigan City to those people?

Meanwhile, the Mayor is bound and determined to move the South Shore from the North End. Proximity to a commuter train is a huge asset for any neighborhood, but MC seems determined to squander yet another opportunity.

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...amp;TM=77823.13

I wonder if there is a greater than zero chance of Oberlie actually reading the Lohan Anderson plan or the Andrews University plan and realizing that one of the key elements for North End redevelopment is having the South Shore here.

Probably not. Why TF do these people insist on spending so goddamn much money on plans they don't intend to implement?

I would rather everyone waited until Oberlie was gone from office and any position of influence. He has been involved in too much for too long, and now he sounds like he is pushing stuff that these readers know I am four-square against. Sheesh! What will it take to keep them from messing stuff up even more?

I see no reason to leave her out of it. She was Chuck's opponent. Rog's post had nothing to do with private developers, but was a rant against the Mayor for not being able to get the creekside slums cleaned up. Since we are all "fools" for re-electing him, he seems to be indicating that a Winski administration would have been smart enough to have gotten all of this taken care of by now. I would like a few specifics on how that would get accomplished so quickly.

As far as what changed my mind... nothing. The library needs to be moved. However, on our list of things to do, it ranks right behind moving the State Prison to Westville and moving the NIPSCO plant to the shores of Pine Lake.

Advertising to outsiders is to invite change. But whether they are advertised to or not, they will come. At my church this weekend, I was introduced to a younger couple from the Northside of Chicago that bought a house here (in the City proper) in the last year. For the time being they spend every other weekend here. Their intention is to eventually give up the Chicago life, move out here and commute. He said repeatedly how much they love it here and how well the commute times compare to the west and northwest suburbs. He told a client of his in passing how much he liked it, and out of the blue he runs into her at a store in town, only to find out that she had looked into it and bought a place of her own here...

As for the SS relocation, remember that accessibility is really a combination of physical proximity and parking availability. How much prime real estate are we going to sacrifice to not only build an elevated railway, but to also build the parking lots necessary for all the commuters. The drive from Elston Grove to Al's (which I imagine is very close to where a relocated train station would be), can't be more than 3 minutes.

Yes, she was one of two of his opponents. But you haven't mentions Jim Larocco anywhere in this...
and if you'd read Roger's other posts you'd realize that his major beef is actually about the shrinking public access to the waterfront. But, if you really want to know what Joie would do differently, call and ask her. I'm sure she'd be glad to share her ideas with you.

Enough said. Let's focus on the topic now.

Elevated railway? Like the El in Chicago? Who is proposing anything like that for the SS?

As for the drive being three minutes, well, for one thing that works both ways. The Andrews U. plan proposes showcasing the SS station on 11th., and includes parking. As for sacrificing prime real estate, it doesn't seem to be very prime at the moment. It will hopefully be prime in the future, but it need to be revitalized first. And I think moving the SS away from the north end is a major step in the wrong direction towards acheiving that goal.

As far as I know, none of us here at CBTL is Joie Winski. Asking us what she would do is kind of silly, it would be made up and none factual. She is pretty easy to get a hold of, call her and ask her about the Creek area. What we do know about is her stand on Franklin St. At City hall during the St. Andrews plan presentation, this was revealed but for some reason kept out of the press. "All of the experts we consulted say the success of North End revitalization calls for relocating the LIBRARY" that would put it at the top of the list, not somewhere behind ridding Michigan City of its single largest employer.

Please don't come up with an opinion soley on two people moving into your Parish. Michigan City has had a populaltion decline for over thirty years. Expert projections are not very promising for the next ten either. Very bleak actualy when compared to Lake and Porter.

Population projections from the Indiana Business Research Center indicate that, by 2020, the Michigan City–La Porte metro will grow 2.3 percent (about 2,500 people) from current levels. This is significantly slower than the state’s anticipated growth of 8.1 percent. The area is expected to have about 5,000 more senior citizens than it did in Census 2000. The growth rate of 34.1 percent for those 65 and older is slower than the state’s anticipated growth of 40.6 percent. However, the metro has a slightly older population to begin with and by 2020, nearly 18 percent of the population will be in the upper age group.

Updated growth projections released Friday for Lake and Porter counties show a 239 percent increase over a prior population forecast, according to a South Shore Railroad consultant.

Having lived in the vicinity of 11th Street many years ago, I think having the tracks there is still a hindrance to development...seriously - would you want to walk out your front door and see this big train going by? There was a coal run that would go through around 11:00 PM shaking the windows - and I was 2 houses away from 11th.

The reason that the Golden Triangle has failed to this point is that the City has done nothing to help it grow.

Think of MC this way. We are a major college basketball program in a power confrence. The problem is we have been down for a long time, while other programs have had good winning histories recently. People aren't going to go here easily, they need to be convinced. They will go to the other schools because of their reputations for winning. We as a City need to really work at building up our assets and working hard on recruiting, neither of which we have really done so far. We just kind of expected people to just show up, because. It doesn't work that way. We need something to get people excited about here, and to make them feel we are on the upswing. Back to the example, we need to hit the recruiting trail, and hit it hard.

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...;ArticleID=9041

I think we are talking about two different things here. There is an existing post that goes over this ad nauseum. There are three proposals on the table for the South Shore, as I understand it. Move it north along Trail Creek which would require an elevated track to clear Trail Creek since the existing swing bridge wouldn't work for an electrified railway. 2. Move it south along the CSX tracks by Ames Field. 3. Leave it alone.

Like I said, find the post and you can see everyone's opinions on the subject in detail...

You are right. I think we tend to create opinions based on what we see right in front of us. Besides what I have seen in church, three very close neighbors are all people who moved here from Chicago.

I wonder if the forecasters actually predicted the rapid redevelopment and growth in those Chicago neighborhoods south of Loop, or did they need to go back and adjust numbers once the trend began?

I'm not sure whether I agree with this statement or not. The lack of private development is the problem. Nobody seems to want to make the first commitment. Whether it's the Warren Building, the old St. John's church or the Eagle Building. Everyone is sitting and waiting for that sign from above. Does government really need to spearhead this, or should an association of private, interested parties be actively recruiting investors with more guts.

Let's look at a triangle, three legs, three angles, all connected. In the case of our GOLDEN TRIANGLE their is quite a bit missing. There are no legs or angles connecting it. Realistically they have absolutely nothing to do with each other. Hell, they have no connection to each other what so ever, there is no easy clear cut path for a visitor to go from one of these attractions to another. Out of town visitors having one of them as their primary destinations have a difficult time finding it. We really need to rid ourselves of the Franklin Street turn-around. Somebody please move the LIBRARY.

You have to remember, we aren't talking about a primo locale when compared to our neighbors. Why would people want to be the first to make a commitment when they could slide into a much more established and reliable community like Chesterton, Valpo, New Buffalo, etc. We don't have the luxuries that they have, so we have to be more aggressive in selling ourselves. People want to know that Michigan City is serious about fixing itself before they are going to be serious about moving/building/opening here. Outsiders, who are going to be the big push here, don't have our level of civic pride, and they have no reason to. Until they live here and acclimate, they won't. They are looking at MC like they would any other town. MC's leadership needs to step into this vacuum and sell this City.

http://thenewsdispatch.com/main.asp?Sectio...amp;TM=57991.57

I have to say I have philosophical problems with using eminent domain to effectively take property away from one private party and give it to another. I'm all for north end redevelopment, as you all know, but this kind of use of government power really bothers me. Roads and other such public works are one thing, but taking property so developers can build on it is something else.